Nikon patents 35mm F2.0 lens for camera with curved full frame sensor

Nikon's never-released DL18-50. Did Nikon abandon this series of 1-inch sensor compacts in order to focus on creating a full-frame mirrorless camera?

A new Nikon lens patent is causing quite a stir in the photo world today, but it's not because of the lens itself. Instead, the patent has people excited because it describes a lens that is made for a curved full-frame sensor, possibly inside a mirrorless camera.

The latter bit is pure speculation—as Nikon Rumors points out, "the patent does not provide sufficient technical information to determine if this is a mirrorless or a DSLR lens," especially since Nikon has patented curved sensors in the past—but the 35mm F2.0 lens described is definitely made to work with a full-frame curved sensor.

It's possible this camera could be a fixed-lens system, bypassing the need to design multiple lenses or figure out how to make zoom lenses work on a curved sensor. For that matter, it's also possible this design never makes it to market. But the fact that Nikon is dabbling in patents here, spending R&D time and money on some real innovation, is at least mildly heartening.

With multiple curved sensor patents and prototypes out in the wild, the correct question now seems to be "when" rather than "if" this technology will make it to the general public. Well, "when" and "who will get there first?"

You can see more diagrams from this patent here: P2017-125904A. And, of course, feel free to speculate your heart out in the comments.

1. It's no going to be "flawless." It's to save money and produce same quality lenses on the cheap. 2. Nikon already can't mount much in the way of lenses from before (unless they were made for Nikon) so they are no worse-off, but people will be disappointed.

Considering a Japanese sold her kidney for an iPhone .... I'd say it would cost around $800.00 per kidney not worthy of a curved sensor that is still in infantile stage. I suggest not to rid of that dialysis machine yet.

If Apple and Sony achieve the same result using different methods then both patents are valid and neither invented what the other developed. Apple's patent also references the Sony patent as prior art. So in the end you were just looking for an opportunity to criticize Apple rather than contribute usefully.

Can't remember a camera line so informed about as the DL Series being cancelled?Nikon, we know great DSLRs are your bread and butter, but do something exciting. Coolpix A-abandoned. 1" sensor with fixed lenses-abandoned. Nikon 1-???

Having read some erudite and also some smart- Aleky replies, I suggest that rather than recalculating everything for a specific curved sensor, sensors will adapt their curvature to the specific lens fitted. That makes universality possible. Besides that, (some) lenses of the future could actually be flat, and use metal instead of glass. That has been tried, and would upset quite a few calculations.

But what percent improvement over we have now is possible? Chasing rainbows. I think the OEMs would do better to work on ergonomics, interfaces and connectivity of cameras. Photography is alive and well, just being done on smart phones. Sharing, viewing, transmitting.

Isn't "flat" just a special case of "curved"? I can see a potential that a properly curved sensor would reduce cosine-related light fall-off, but optical design still has to match another "special case" of curvature using a non-flat sensor...unless the sensor can be curved as required to suit the lens design...

Thought experiment: So, say you can use a lens (made for a curved sensor) on a flat sensor. What would you have image wise? Would the resulting image "vignette" in focus (gets more blurry towards the edge) and brightness (gets darker towards edge)? Would there be an elongation/stretching of the represented object?

Just make certain the body looks like a retro design rather than some Nikon management inspired fantasy weirdness only appealing to Aliens on Alpha Centauri. No Aliens from Alpha Centauri were injured during the creation of this posting.

You'll have to look that up yourself. Would "certain people working in the country of France" suit you better?Personally, I have no idea of the details. It appeared to be a fact though, as presented. I'll be happy for you to enlighten me.

its entirely possible for lenses to bypass a bodies sensor and have incorporated in the lens like was done in the Ricoh grd system while preserving the more conventional approch

i don't understand this opinion that a zoom can not correct across its range on a curved sensor but countless long and short zooms can be designed to do so on a flat conventional sensor .... it makes absolutely no sense

flat sensors and correcting for them is the most optically challenging zooms do ... curved sensors would only simplify that....... if they can act over a magnification range got flat they can for curved

Maybe each lens needs its own dedicated curved sensor. So, what about making a dedicated curved sensor part of each interchangeable lens? After a few years you could screw the sensor out of your lens and screw an improved one in. Maybe the sensor has to be combined with the processor.

I don't know if that idea is worth to be realised and if it is technically feasible.

If it's a full-frame, fixed lens leaf-shutter 35/2 digital rangefinder with retro styling queues from the legendary S models, then please take my money. Otherwise... Just announce the D820 so we can get on with our lives.

Nice to see Sony, and OK Nikon too, continuing to innovate and push the technology envelope. If this seems too much, think about the retina of our eyes. They are not flat. I see this as a definite advance in photography and new possibilities in performance, features and applications in future. For example, many problems in the design of extremely wide lenses can be fixed with curved sensors.

You just do not know what are you talking about. One less works on one sensor yes. Two lenses (different FL on same sensor) NO. This is SIMPLE optics!Parents are made to create IP value in most of cases.Let me explain everyone again.You have one lens with FL say 50mm. It creates some spherical image. Yes. Sharp? NOT for polychromatic light!!!!!!!!For monochromatic yes! Now try to fit 100mm FL lens image into 50mm lens circle!Puzzled?Download ZeMax. Play with lens simulations if you need visualization of this SIMPLE as hell basic physical principle!These discussions are akin of an idiot seller on eBay who is selling uncoated filters and feeding buyers with BS that AR coating actually increases reflections.Read books before proposing to fit image of two different FL into one curvature!This is viable only for one lens one sensor design. Even there it will not be be cheaper then classical design.Am I rude? Might be. Sorry for that. Science is there and no one will override it.P.S. chromatic aberrations will NOT disappear just because you have curved sensor. People will learn to make frensel lenses of sufficient optical quality faster then some of pseudoscientists will make two lens one curved sensor design to work (cheaper then classical lenses).Anyone e wants to bet this?

Rensol, Making various focal length lenses for our present flat sensors is of course a compromise, especially for wide angle, and less so for longer lenses. It's possible that by SLIGHTLY curving a sensor that compromise could be reduced for a range of focal lengths. Of course that would need a whole range of new lenses so it would outdate existing lenses. Present sensors are flat because film had to be flat, (except in some panoramic cameras.) and digital cameras and lenses evolved from film cameras. Not to mention obvious manufacturing difficulties with curved sensors. I speculate that a curved sensor could be an advantage in a specialised astrophotography wide angle camera to eliminate points of light from stars / planets becoming elongated in the corners of the image.

If lenses project a curve each a different one depending of focal length they have to correct for this. Exactly like they have to correct for a plane sensor... That is an approximation of the curve of an extremely long focal length.

It doesn't make sense to optimize for infinite focal length as both the 50 and 100mm lenses would have to adapt a lot.

But then make some curved sensor, and you'll find that maybe 500mm lenses would be arder to design but that lenss in the range of 15-100mm would be easier to design, and that's exactly the point.

Looks like "throw out all your old glass" businessmodel. Nothing will work. How about a cheap MF Body with flat sensor that takes FF lenses too.... I heard those chips are cheap now that curved is en vogue.

Yeah, and the curves won't be standard, so Sigma, Tamron etc will have to make different back-ends optically as well as the effort they currently go to on the physical side (different mount and throat depth).And "no-glass" adapter manufacturers will have to add glass! (and different glass for each brand combo of curved sensor and curve-based lens)At least "flat" was standard!

Let's hope they make it D5-like. And if they put it in a new business unit, that would be a disaster. No fickle management -- it needs to be a commitment to excellence. Start with the BEST. Have people FALL IN LOVE with the product. Want it. Even if expensive. Then make more affordable versions.

The Nikon 1 failed, because Nikon made cheap garbage versions first. No one cares. They liked the AF, and hated everything else. Nikon had just started to come out with cool versions and then had to cancel the project basically because they wasted so much time.

BRING OUT THE BEST FIRST -- people will fall in love, and then make it more affordable.

What gave you the idea that I want lighter lenses? I'm not asking for lighter lenses, just speculating on the advantages of the curved sensor that has just been patented.And if they can make all lenses lighter with better light transmission, not only primes, then why not?

The Panasonic FZ1000 II is a worthy successor to the company's first large-sensor, long-zoom bridge camera, and a value-conscious rival to the popular Sony RX10-series. It's just as fast as its predecessor but produces nicer JPEGs, has significantly improved controls and interface, and more.

Latest buying guides

What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that might be a bit older but still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best.

Believe it or not, there are still people that like to print out their photos and create photo books to send gifts to family members. We looked at five popular photo printing services and have chosen the best.

If you are looking for a fun photography project to try, Mathieu Stern has a neat idea for you. Using the 'anthotype' process, Stern used only beetroot juice, paper, a photo positive and a bit of time in the sun to create a phytotype photograph.

Cameras' video capabilities just keep getting better. But what if you're not interested in video? Here's why you probably won't get stills-only versions of most cameras, and why they wouldn't be cheaper, if you did.

DxO has announced Nik Collection 3. The popular plugin suite includes a new Perspective Efex plugin for fixing distortion and adjusting perspective, bringing the total number of plugins in the suite to eight.

The term 'computational photography' gets used a lot these days, but what exactly is it? In this article, the first in a three-part series, guest contributor Vasily Zubarev dives deep to show us how photography will work in the future.